The Huffington Post (“HuffPo”) is a news and opinion Web site founded in May 2005 that offers coverage of politics, media, business, entertainment, living, style and green. Its co-founders, Arianna Huffington, Kenneth Lerer and Jonah Peretti, have admitted to starting the site as a counter to the conservative Drudge Report. Huffington even acknowledged the Matt Drudge and his Drudge Report as a source of inspiration.
“We could not have existed without Drudge,” Huffington told the Washington Post in 2007. “Drudge habituated people to going online for their news.”
After examining the Huffington Post, it is clear why the site does so well. It is extremely user-friendly, with tabs categorizing news articles by topic and region. Bloggers are a separate category, and side columns highlight the most popular articles and blogs for the readers. While advertisements are noticeable, they do not interrupt stories’ text and are clearly identifiable. The photographs on the page vary in size, orientation and content. Some are rather boring photos of speeches, but some people can argue that these help readers identify prominent figures on the site and draw more traffic to the site with their big names and image results for search engines. By enabling readers to follow the site through Twitter, Yahoo, Buzz, BlackBerry, Google, iPhone, e-mail and RSS feeds, the Huffington Post succeeds in covering all its bases.
The links at the bottom of the home page provide hyperlinks to other news sources, such as the Associated Press and BBC Web sites, and also lists blogs and columnists. Basically, the site does everything possible to saturate the reader with content. Because space is unlimited online, it’s OK for the Huffington Post to post things several times all over the site. The links provided are also a hint to where the site gets a lot of the articles. I don’t think Huffington would link to rival sites—the Drudge Report is not linked.
The Huffington Post had 8.9 million unique visitors in February 2009. In the last five years, the HuffPo has received literally millions in investments.
In August 2006, SoftBank Capital invested $5 million in the site, which had grown in popularity in only a year, to help expand it. Plans included hiring more staff to update the site 24 hours a day, hiring in-house reporters, and a multimedia team to do video reports.
In November 2008, The Huffington Post completed a $15 million fundraising from investors. The money will finance expansion including more journalism and the provision of local news.
In 2009 the HuffPo announced that it received $25 million in funding from Oak Investment Parts, a California-based venture capital firm. Huffington said the money will be used to invest in the company's technology and infrastructure, increase its in-house advertising capabilities and continue to expand its content. Local versions and a new investigative journalism initiative were part of the investment plan.
In the past, the site benefitted from Huffington’s personal connections with celebrities and partnerships with People, Rolling Stone and TMZ.com, which according to Huffington, represents a new era for mainstream media that share content with competitors.
New sections of the HuffPo I found:
OffTheBus is a citizen-powered online news organization that is a collaboration between New York University and Jay Rosen’s NewAssignment.Net.
FundRace is a section that tracks contributions to the presidential campaigns and includes a mapping feature that shows contributions broken down by city, neighborhood and block.
In my research on the site, two recent launchings act as testament to the always-updating aspect of the Internet. Whatever is in print is old the second it’s printed.
In February, Huffington said she’s been on college campuses across the nation making appearances and going on tours with her daughter, which made her miss the vitality of college life. The new college section aggregates content from more than 60 college papers. Check out an Alligator article titled "Demanding Justice for Shot Grad Student" on the HuffPo here.
The Huffington Post has spent the past few years expanding beyond its initial political focus. This week the site went back to its roots by launching the HuffPost Hill -- a daily e-mail newsletter. The founders said HuffPost Hill will blend news and opinion with Washington, D.C., gossip. Huffington Post chief White House correspondent Sam Stein and senior Washington correspondent Dan Froomkin are a few of the contributors, but political reporting is not the only focus; HuffPost Hill will follow celebrity and politician sightings in the capital and will feature tips on various fundraisers and TV appearances by political experts.
According to HuffPo senior congressional correspondent Ryan Grim, the e-newsletter should serve as a platform for smaller news items that would otherwise be left on the cutting room floor.
Media Bistro has a couple quotes from the founders and contributors to HuffPo Hill.
Below is an interview I had with Leah Finnegan, a staffer for the Huffington Post’s new college section:
How did you get a position at the Huffington Post?
My friend sent me a Craiglist post advertising it.
What do your duties include?
Every day, I update the college page multiple times. I link to stories, condense multiple stories into one post, talk to college editors, create slideshows, brainstorm and have lots of meetings with my boss.
How active are the site’s founders in day-to-day proceedings?
Fairly active. I get e-mails from Arianna (Huffington) on a regular basis about stories, ideas etc.
Does the HuffPo hold budget meetings for the day’s front page like a print paper?
No
How do you get traffic? How do you market the site?
Search Engine Optimization, Twitter, Facebook, in-house coordination
What kind of technology do you use?
The Huffington Post is super Google-savvy and knows how to read search engines so that HuffPost content goes to as massive an audience as possible.
Do you pay a lot of attention to Search Engine Optimization, especially for headlines?
Yes. Keywords
What is the revenue model for the HuffPo? Advertising only?
Mostly, I think. Not quite sure.
Do you sell your own ads? Or do you use an ad network?
We have our own ad staff.
Who do you think are your main competitors?
Yahoo, The Daily Beast, AOL, New York Times, Wash Post, Drudge Report, Gawker
How big of a staff do you have? Are your writers paid? Are you paid?
I am paid. There are about 100 people on staff. I work with one senior editor and one intern, who is unpaid.
How do you handle comments and contributed content? Do you review them before publication? How do you prevent inappropriate things from being posted?
We have comment moderators scattered across the country who monitor comment content. If I'm posting a sensitive story, I can opt to impose automatic moderation. A team of blog editors maintains quality control over that area.
What about citizen journalism?
Citizen journalism is a healthy component of HuffPost College -- we have correspondents on several campuses who regularly write us original stories that always do pretty well on our page.
How often do you update?
6 to 7 times per day, posting multiple stories at a time.
Have you looked at aggregating local blogs and other kinds of content rather than producing it all yourselves?
We aggregate content from more than 60 college papers daily.
Do you intend to do anything in print ever?
In my own career? Maybe. At HuffPost? No.
What would you tell someone looking for a job or internship at the Huffington Post?
This is what we post on our Web site for college section internships:
The Huffington Post recently launched a new vertical called HuffPost College and has an opening for a unpaid internship. Ideally, the candidate is a current student or recent college graduate who has worked for his/her school paper and is familiar with the in's-and-out's of collegiate news. Although this internship will continue into summer, the ideal candidate will be able to start ASAP. The best candidates will be meticulous, well-organized and is passionate about news.
Primary responsibilities include:
- Establishing contacts with writers, editors and advisers of numerous college news sites
- Forging and maintaining relationships with leaders at college newspapers
- Correspondence and other communication, including editorial and technical problem-solving, with blog contributors
- Editing and publishing content from student journalists around the country
- Assisting in long-term strategy-building and goal-setting for HuffPost College
Experience with Photoshop, Movable Type or similar blogging platform, basic HTML preferred.
This is a great opportunity to start something new at a leading news site.
Send resume and very brief statement of interest to huffpostcollege@gmail.com with "HuffPost - College" in subject line.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Journalism Education Conference
After reading the journalist panel's arguments, I agree that social media is having a great effect on my generation's way of gathering news, but they will never replace newswire journalism. Citizen journalists and word of mouth are very helpful sources for story ideas, but journalists cannot rely on the public to do a thorough job of reporting. Bloggers will not be reprimanded if their information is false or if they don't update regularly.
I also agreed that while news specialization has some benefits, its better to have journalists who can relate to a broad range of topics and can "connect the dots" for the average reader. People are naturally drawn to topics based on their experiences, so editors can rely on someone who is very politically active to cover local government, while someone who enjoys reading about medical findings can write the health beat, etc. Journalists who are trained in a variety of skills and who are informed about lots of topics are more valuable than a specialized journalist because they can tackle anything pops up in the newsroom.
Charlies Beckett said one major problem is the vast amount of duplicated work that journalists are encouraged to produce that is "formulaic, irrelevant and can be found elsewhere." I agree that with the Internet, there are too many other sources of information that the public goes to before reading the paper. I love that search engines offers the "news" filter for searches, but most times Wikipedia is the top source for information, instead of news sites. Journalists need to figure out a way to make their credible stories appear higher on search engine results (using Search Engine Optimization is one way to do this).
I don't agree with John Nichols claims that the Internet is just another platform for media, and that there is no difference between free and pay journalism. Advertising will sustain journalism, just like it sustained newspapers and broadcasts in the past and is sustaining Facebook now.I do agree that information cannot be caged, which is why we are having the problem's we're having today. There is no way to stop unchecked information from spreading online. People will believe anything, and young people are questioning information presented to them less and less. I hope that his claim that paid journalists will not exist in eight years is wrong, as well. Journalism as we recognize it today may disappear, but the public won't let it completely disappear. Someone will be a journalist for a living in the future. If journalists disappear, who is going to tell them what happened in their city (state, country, the world) today?
I also agreed that while news specialization has some benefits, its better to have journalists who can relate to a broad range of topics and can "connect the dots" for the average reader. People are naturally drawn to topics based on their experiences, so editors can rely on someone who is very politically active to cover local government, while someone who enjoys reading about medical findings can write the health beat, etc. Journalists who are trained in a variety of skills and who are informed about lots of topics are more valuable than a specialized journalist because they can tackle anything pops up in the newsroom.
Charlies Beckett said one major problem is the vast amount of duplicated work that journalists are encouraged to produce that is "formulaic, irrelevant and can be found elsewhere." I agree that with the Internet, there are too many other sources of information that the public goes to before reading the paper. I love that search engines offers the "news" filter for searches, but most times Wikipedia is the top source for information, instead of news sites. Journalists need to figure out a way to make their credible stories appear higher on search engine results (using Search Engine Optimization is one way to do this).
I don't agree with John Nichols claims that the Internet is just another platform for media, and that there is no difference between free and pay journalism. Advertising will sustain journalism, just like it sustained newspapers and broadcasts in the past and is sustaining Facebook now.I do agree that information cannot be caged, which is why we are having the problem's we're having today. There is no way to stop unchecked information from spreading online. People will believe anything, and young people are questioning information presented to them less and less. I hope that his claim that paid journalists will not exist in eight years is wrong, as well. Journalism as we recognize it today may disappear, but the public won't let it completely disappear. Someone will be a journalist for a living in the future. If journalists disappear, who is going to tell them what happened in their city (state, country, the world) today?
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
"Supermedia: Saving Journalism So It Can Save the World"
After reading the assigned articles and Charlie Beckett’s “SuperMedia: Saving Journalism So It Can Save the World,” the solution to revamping journalism for this generation is through harnessing user-generated content. The fervor in which college and high school students text-message, Tweet and log in to Facebook daily is phenomenal. Facebook statuses can inspire news stories- the trouble is linking the citizen journalist to a publication and finding a way to pay for it and turn a profit. Community forums and blogs provide feedback from people who don’t insist on being paid, so it will be cheap for newspapers to hire these volunteer writers. Beckett was right in writing that readers can be divided into four groups: traditional writers of letters to the editor; the ones who take it to the next level with heavy-duty blogging; the virtually passive people who want packaged news delivered to them; and the social users who will consume news and want to provide content and interaction with the news flow.
According to Beckett, Networked Journalism has three benefits for engaging the “former audience”: it brings the audience back to the process, it brings content to the process and it brings moral and political value to the process. Marketing and research is wasted on targeting hard-to-reach audiences, when there’s a whole blogosphere of eager citizen journalists just waiting to contribute. However, sifting through these postings and story ideas requires staff. Not everyone’s contribution will be useful, but hopefully every post will play a part in the online conversation. Even the bad ideas can generate content that may turn into something useful. Message boards are a great medium for this. Staffers at an online paper can skim through message boards and see which comments are receiving the most hits, instead of having a freelance editor sifting through e-mails of proposed stories.
It is impossible to ignore the biggest concern with user-generated content. No publication wants to rely on amateurs who know nothing about media literacy. However, by recognizing members of the public as part of the publication, newspapers can promote writer accountability. Writers will want to do a better job if they are forced to claim ownership of what they write (and live under the same media laws). For example, when Wikipedia first came out, maybe people, especially college professors, questioned its accuracy. Example after example popped up of facts that were wrong and things that made it onto the site that were completely irrelevant. But now, more college professors are saying Wikipedia is a great starting point for research. Yes, mistakes are made, but the same is true when newspapers mess up and run a correction, so it should not stop amateurs from contributing what they know. The more brains working toward the same effort, the better.
Although embracing amateur writers as part of a publication may help, nothing is for sure. Several sources in Beckett’s book argue that old media were the gatekeepers of facts, and they cannot ignore the fact that some people like to make things up to gain attention. The recent Balloon Boy incident is a perfect example of amateur reporters looking for fame, rather than the truth. Despite all signs that the little boy was not inside the balloon, the video, shot by amateur reporters, spread to news channels across the nation and alerted the nation. It is sad that the officials involved, who were trying to do their job and save a life, were actually spoofed on national television by a greedy family.
I think the biggest reason for the Balloon Boy incident was that every news channel couldn’t be physically there to cover the story, and they didn’t want to be the only channel not covering the story, so they fell for it. However, this reflects a change in media. Newspapers cannot expect to do all the reporting by themselves. The world is too global, their staff is too small and budget cuts have hit them hard. This is why it is important to collaborate with other publications. Some Web sites, especially online-only sites, link to other papers’ coverage of stories, instead of wasting resources to cover the event itself. Although this lessens competition between publications, I think it is a great idea. It’s simply a modified version of the Associated Press. Because production costs are falling (because online media and citizen journalists are cheap), competition is increasing and profits are threatened. Newspapers need to do less to do more now. If they remain stubborn and try to do everything on their own, their demise will come even faster.
Collaboration between the public and media is even harder in the Editorial sections. There will always be a reader who thinks they know more than a columnist, and will let the columnist know. This used to be done through anonymous letters to the editor, but now blogging allows the “constructive” criticism to be posted directly under the column. A code of conduct needs to be set for the public, as well as the journalists, and it is the editors’ job to moderate all content without limiting freedom of speech. All opinions are valid, as long as they are expressed in a respectful manner and attempt to contribute to the conversation. Arrogance plays a huge part in the criticisms, and part of Networked Journalists’ new feats is dealing with how up close and personal the public can get to them online.
The public can use search engines like Google to hone in on the articles they want to discuss and criticize, which is both good and bad. Google has become a super force to be reckoned with, and while I agree with Beckett that Google News is a wonderful source of news, I feel the same way about how the search engine returns results. The top results on Google are not the sites searched for the most by the public, but rather are the Web site that pay Google the most. This pricing structure limits access to markets and denies the public choice and information. However, without the revenue from Google’s sponsors, the search engine that millions of people use daily, would struggle to exist. It is a necessary hurdle for journalists.
Overall, I think Beckett offered some really optimistic suggestions for solving journalism's current problems. However, I feel he left out how most of these things will be paid for and actually put into actions. He idealized the situation.
Also, it was sad to see how many grammatical errors the book contained. I think this is very ironic, because it reflects the lack of resources authors have nowadays for even simple things like editing copy.
According to Beckett, Networked Journalism has three benefits for engaging the “former audience”: it brings the audience back to the process, it brings content to the process and it brings moral and political value to the process. Marketing and research is wasted on targeting hard-to-reach audiences, when there’s a whole blogosphere of eager citizen journalists just waiting to contribute. However, sifting through these postings and story ideas requires staff. Not everyone’s contribution will be useful, but hopefully every post will play a part in the online conversation. Even the bad ideas can generate content that may turn into something useful. Message boards are a great medium for this. Staffers at an online paper can skim through message boards and see which comments are receiving the most hits, instead of having a freelance editor sifting through e-mails of proposed stories.
It is impossible to ignore the biggest concern with user-generated content. No publication wants to rely on amateurs who know nothing about media literacy. However, by recognizing members of the public as part of the publication, newspapers can promote writer accountability. Writers will want to do a better job if they are forced to claim ownership of what they write (and live under the same media laws). For example, when Wikipedia first came out, maybe people, especially college professors, questioned its accuracy. Example after example popped up of facts that were wrong and things that made it onto the site that were completely irrelevant. But now, more college professors are saying Wikipedia is a great starting point for research. Yes, mistakes are made, but the same is true when newspapers mess up and run a correction, so it should not stop amateurs from contributing what they know. The more brains working toward the same effort, the better.
Although embracing amateur writers as part of a publication may help, nothing is for sure. Several sources in Beckett’s book argue that old media were the gatekeepers of facts, and they cannot ignore the fact that some people like to make things up to gain attention. The recent Balloon Boy incident is a perfect example of amateur reporters looking for fame, rather than the truth. Despite all signs that the little boy was not inside the balloon, the video, shot by amateur reporters, spread to news channels across the nation and alerted the nation. It is sad that the officials involved, who were trying to do their job and save a life, were actually spoofed on national television by a greedy family.
I think the biggest reason for the Balloon Boy incident was that every news channel couldn’t be physically there to cover the story, and they didn’t want to be the only channel not covering the story, so they fell for it. However, this reflects a change in media. Newspapers cannot expect to do all the reporting by themselves. The world is too global, their staff is too small and budget cuts have hit them hard. This is why it is important to collaborate with other publications. Some Web sites, especially online-only sites, link to other papers’ coverage of stories, instead of wasting resources to cover the event itself. Although this lessens competition between publications, I think it is a great idea. It’s simply a modified version of the Associated Press. Because production costs are falling (because online media and citizen journalists are cheap), competition is increasing and profits are threatened. Newspapers need to do less to do more now. If they remain stubborn and try to do everything on their own, their demise will come even faster.
Collaboration between the public and media is even harder in the Editorial sections. There will always be a reader who thinks they know more than a columnist, and will let the columnist know. This used to be done through anonymous letters to the editor, but now blogging allows the “constructive” criticism to be posted directly under the column. A code of conduct needs to be set for the public, as well as the journalists, and it is the editors’ job to moderate all content without limiting freedom of speech. All opinions are valid, as long as they are expressed in a respectful manner and attempt to contribute to the conversation. Arrogance plays a huge part in the criticisms, and part of Networked Journalists’ new feats is dealing with how up close and personal the public can get to them online.
The public can use search engines like Google to hone in on the articles they want to discuss and criticize, which is both good and bad. Google has become a super force to be reckoned with, and while I agree with Beckett that Google News is a wonderful source of news, I feel the same way about how the search engine returns results. The top results on Google are not the sites searched for the most by the public, but rather are the Web site that pay Google the most. This pricing structure limits access to markets and denies the public choice and information. However, without the revenue from Google’s sponsors, the search engine that millions of people use daily, would struggle to exist. It is a necessary hurdle for journalists.
Overall, I think Beckett offered some really optimistic suggestions for solving journalism's current problems. However, I feel he left out how most of these things will be paid for and actually put into actions. He idealized the situation.
Also, it was sad to see how many grammatical errors the book contained. I think this is very ironic, because it reflects the lack of resources authors have nowadays for even simple things like editing copy.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Week 13 Blog
After reading the article "With information galore, we need news judgment," I completely agree with the author. A reader's most valuable asset is his or her attention, so journalists should do anything possible to catch it. This can mean changing online headlines to have better Search Engine Optimization, or by making sites user-friendly by giving readers the information they want to know--and fast. Infographics and easy-to-read charts help condense important information for Web browsers who are used to doing things as fast as a click of their mouse.
I also agreed with the point that newspapers cannot be afraid of change because otherwise they will fall behind everyone else. I see this at the paper I work at:
Because the board of directors are hesitating to update the layout for fear of losing loyal readers, we aren't gaining any new ones. The paper is trapped in the '70s, and advertisers are moving elsewhere to reach the young college demographic for their ads-- mainly online.
The Daily Dish's chart of the day was a graph shows a parabola on a graph with "information" on the x-axis and "confusing" on the y-axis. A little information and too much information means lots of confusion. It is a journalist's job to give the readers information in moderation. Too much can overwhelm and and too little can leave them asking asking questions-- and make them leave your publication for another publication's answers.
The articles "Thanks to technology, we may be entering a golden age of journalism" and "New age journalism" say everything I've said to critics and cynics of me being a journalism major in this day and age. Yes, newspapers have closed. Yes, journalists have lost their jobs. Yes, papers have cut costs in every way possible. But jobs are still out there. There is still a need for hard news in a world of fluff and stuff. People do care about current events. They do want to know what's happening in their neighborhood-- their city-- their state-- their nation and even internationally. I'm relying on my professors at the University of Florida to give me an advantage in the job market. The more new skills they can introduce me to, the better. The second article really focused on the salacious aspect of media these days. It doesn't surprise me that TV producers and photographers get the story, and then the facts. The balloon boy is a perfect example of this. However, journalists can't do this. It's not OK to post the story online and edit for fact errors later. Post what you know ASAP and add more as you go.
I thought the search return for "free newspapers" was fascinating. Online papers opens up a whole new can of worms. My generation is used to accessing sites for free and is used to just "Googling" for information. I won't pay to read an article online? Why should I? I can get most stories from TV, which I already pay for. It's sad to see the worth of each article to a consumer. The entire paper costs between 75 cents and $1.50. Divide it by the number of stories inside, and you got your answer to how much readers will pay-- hardly anything. Online newspapers get all their money from advertisements, not subscribers, so if they make their paper one that readers run to for answers, like The New York Times has done, then they will last. If they add user-friendly neighborhood message boards, they will find a loyal fan base.
I also agreed with the point that newspapers cannot be afraid of change because otherwise they will fall behind everyone else. I see this at the paper I work at:
Because the board of directors are hesitating to update the layout for fear of losing loyal readers, we aren't gaining any new ones. The paper is trapped in the '70s, and advertisers are moving elsewhere to reach the young college demographic for their ads-- mainly online.
The Daily Dish's chart of the day was a graph shows a parabola on a graph with "information" on the x-axis and "confusing" on the y-axis. A little information and too much information means lots of confusion. It is a journalist's job to give the readers information in moderation. Too much can overwhelm and and too little can leave them asking asking questions-- and make them leave your publication for another publication's answers.
The articles "Thanks to technology, we may be entering a golden age of journalism" and "New age journalism" say everything I've said to critics and cynics of me being a journalism major in this day and age. Yes, newspapers have closed. Yes, journalists have lost their jobs. Yes, papers have cut costs in every way possible. But jobs are still out there. There is still a need for hard news in a world of fluff and stuff. People do care about current events. They do want to know what's happening in their neighborhood-- their city-- their state-- their nation and even internationally. I'm relying on my professors at the University of Florida to give me an advantage in the job market. The more new skills they can introduce me to, the better. The second article really focused on the salacious aspect of media these days. It doesn't surprise me that TV producers and photographers get the story, and then the facts. The balloon boy is a perfect example of this. However, journalists can't do this. It's not OK to post the story online and edit for fact errors later. Post what you know ASAP and add more as you go.
I thought the search return for "free newspapers" was fascinating. Online papers opens up a whole new can of worms. My generation is used to accessing sites for free and is used to just "Googling" for information. I won't pay to read an article online? Why should I? I can get most stories from TV, which I already pay for. It's sad to see the worth of each article to a consumer. The entire paper costs between 75 cents and $1.50. Divide it by the number of stories inside, and you got your answer to how much readers will pay-- hardly anything. Online newspapers get all their money from advertisements, not subscribers, so if they make their paper one that readers run to for answers, like The New York Times has done, then they will last. If they add user-friendly neighborhood message boards, they will find a loyal fan base.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Wordled Speeches
I really think Wordle is a useful tool for finding the crucial points of a story. Wordle simply generates a "word cloud" from submitted text and highlights the most used words. After using Wordle on a story about public records revealing student government criminal charges at my college, it was clear to see the repeat offenses and offenders. It's a great tool to hone in on key words for headlines, too, because sometimes stories lack focus and you think the story is about one thing, but it really turns into something else.
I also used Wordle to examine my blog, and I'm happy to see that journalism, media, citizens, people and story jump out. The only thing I don't like about the word generator is that it doesn't recognize phrases-- for example "citizen journalism" gets broken up into CITIZEN and JOURNALISM.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Palin Speech
In this post, I'll attempt to answer the following questions in response to Vanity Fair's editing of Sarah Palin's resignation speech:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/07/palin-speech-edit-200907
1. What are the problematics of speeches vis-a-vis the reporter and the editor?
2. What does this say about the role/importance of editors/editing in general?
3. What things (plural) have the editor done with this speech.
4. Has the editor made it better. If so, how? If not, why not?
The speech is absolutely terrible, and the amount of editing coloring the pages is a reflection of that. While the editor's red marks make the speech so much better by eliminating awkward wording and bad grammar, I think the green marks by the research editor were more important. Palin had several fact errors, exaggerations and misleading statements that reduce her speech to uneducated rambling. Her confusion of Andrew Johnson with Abraham Lincoln reveals her lack of knowledge of Alaska's history, which she attempted to use to connect with her constituents. Her claims that ethics inquiries wasted Americans' tax dollars were misleading because all the inquiries were made by Alaskan residents and agencies, and the state shelled out $200,000 to investigate, not $2 million. She does not explain how this money was taken away from education and police/highway funds either.
She says that she knows people are going to question her timing of her resignation, but then does not elaborate on how she has made the right decision by resigning now.
The role and importance of editing can be seen throughout this examples. The media play a huge role in keeping an eye on politicians' claims and lets the public know when they are skewing the truth. Simple editing can make the message that much clearer and more concise, which in turn reaches the reader better. Without editing, Palin seems like a complete idiot. After editing, she seems like she actually had some reason why she was elected governor.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/07/palin-speech-edit-200907
1. What are the problematics of speeches vis-a-vis the reporter and the editor?
2. What does this say about the role/importance of editors/editing in general?
3. What things (plural) have the editor done with this speech.
4. Has the editor made it better. If so, how? If not, why not?
The speech is absolutely terrible, and the amount of editing coloring the pages is a reflection of that. While the editor's red marks make the speech so much better by eliminating awkward wording and bad grammar, I think the green marks by the research editor were more important. Palin had several fact errors, exaggerations and misleading statements that reduce her speech to uneducated rambling. Her confusion of Andrew Johnson with Abraham Lincoln reveals her lack of knowledge of Alaska's history, which she attempted to use to connect with her constituents. Her claims that ethics inquiries wasted Americans' tax dollars were misleading because all the inquiries were made by Alaskan residents and agencies, and the state shelled out $200,000 to investigate, not $2 million. She does not explain how this money was taken away from education and police/highway funds either.
She says that she knows people are going to question her timing of her resignation, but then does not elaborate on how she has made the right decision by resigning now.
The role and importance of editing can be seen throughout this examples. The media play a huge role in keeping an eye on politicians' claims and lets the public know when they are skewing the truth. Simple editing can make the message that much clearer and more concise, which in turn reaches the reader better. Without editing, Palin seems like a complete idiot. After editing, she seems like she actually had some reason why she was elected governor.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Neighborhood Blogs / Hyperlocal / Citizen Journalism / Citizen Media
Who you know can make all the difference for breaking news. The more eyes and ears you have working for you, the better the sources and the better your end result-- your story-- will be. I think the greatest testament to citizen journalism for my generation is how quickly word of mouth travels through Facebook and Twitter. Most times I find out that a celebrity has died or that a tragedy has happened through people's updated statuses and Tweets. Although at times having more than 1,000 "friends" on Facebook can seem ridiculous, I realize that Facebook isn't what Myspace used to be: a place for friends. It honestly is a new networking tool and a great source for stories and tips.
Being hyper-local is not easy. Gaining a local audience is key to surviving in the new social media world. Anything your staff can do to gain page views needs to be done. Advertisements for local businesses can help, but creating a niche Web site can really increase your reach. A lot of newspapers have launched their separate online niche sites completely run by citizen journalists. The more views each blog receives, the more money the writer is paid. A perfect example of this is that The Independent Florida Alligator, my college's paper, recently became part of The Huffington Post's college branch. The college section really narrows the demographic of the readers, and can make advertising certain age-specific products way more effective. The Chicago Tribune Chicagonow and The Miami Herald's five communities Web sites are examples of bigger newspapers increasing their readership in a cheap way during budget-cut times.
After reading a lot of the reviews for WikiCity, I have to say that I think it is a great idea. The site only gets out what the locals put in, but in small towns, locals will talk and blog because they don't have their own newspaper or news channel. Yes, there is always the concern that, like Wikipedia, people who blog can be wrong, but other citizen journalists can update and correct their mistakes as well. The site is different because it starts like a phone book, listing local businesses, but it can grow into a source of news about everything in town.
When relying on citizen journalists for content, it is a good idea to make sure they know a little about the ABC's of journalism. Start by teaching the basic, like fact-checking all proper nouns in a story and being consistent with tenses. Workshops can help train new writers. Positive reinforcement and constructive criticism will help your writers stick with you and improve. If they enjoy writing, they will remain in contact, and you will have one more reporter listening for news.
According to a map from the Knight Citizens News Network, there are more than 800 different citizen media sites in the nation. Why is this surprising to me? Because building hyperlocal pages , particularly for the smallest newspapers, can be costly, time-consuming and sometimes impossible given technological limitations of staffs. I know at my paper, it's hard enough to attract student writers who are supposedly looking for clips for their portfolio and want writing experience. But even with the need for writing experience, some students' time is precious and they have other commitments. The same holds true for working adults. But I think the coolest part of citizen journalism is that despite having families to raise and jobs to work at, so many parents and adults have time to blog for their sites. They WANT to. It keeps them informed and also helps the neighborhood out at the same time.
Another aspect of citizen journalism is the community's bloggers become watchdogs, just like news reporters are supposed to be. Julie Faneslow's example of how a community helped eliminate a heroin/meth problem parallels a current story at my paper. On March 2, a graduate student/ teacher's assistant/ international student was shot by university police, after being Tasered and bean-bagged. Because the case is under investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the State Attorney's Office, reporters haven't been given much information. Fortunately, concerned citizens from the community have posted on every story about this incident and have come forward to the newsroom with tips. From family friends to coworkers and neighbors, the variety of sources has greatly assisted writers, and it was all made possible by feedback on our Web site.
Being hyper-local is not easy. Gaining a local audience is key to surviving in the new social media world. Anything your staff can do to gain page views needs to be done. Advertisements for local businesses can help, but creating a niche Web site can really increase your reach. A lot of newspapers have launched their separate online niche sites completely run by citizen journalists. The more views each blog receives, the more money the writer is paid. A perfect example of this is that The Independent Florida Alligator, my college's paper, recently became part of The Huffington Post's college branch. The college section really narrows the demographic of the readers, and can make advertising certain age-specific products way more effective. The Chicago Tribune Chicagonow and The Miami Herald's five communities Web sites are examples of bigger newspapers increasing their readership in a cheap way during budget-cut times.
After reading a lot of the reviews for WikiCity, I have to say that I think it is a great idea. The site only gets out what the locals put in, but in small towns, locals will talk and blog because they don't have their own newspaper or news channel. Yes, there is always the concern that, like Wikipedia, people who blog can be wrong, but other citizen journalists can update and correct their mistakes as well. The site is different because it starts like a phone book, listing local businesses, but it can grow into a source of news about everything in town.
When relying on citizen journalists for content, it is a good idea to make sure they know a little about the ABC's of journalism. Start by teaching the basic, like fact-checking all proper nouns in a story and being consistent with tenses. Workshops can help train new writers. Positive reinforcement and constructive criticism will help your writers stick with you and improve. If they enjoy writing, they will remain in contact, and you will have one more reporter listening for news.
According to a map from the Knight Citizens News Network, there are more than 800 different citizen media sites in the nation. Why is this surprising to me? Because building hyperlocal pages , particularly for the smallest newspapers, can be costly, time-consuming and sometimes impossible given technological limitations of staffs. I know at my paper, it's hard enough to attract student writers who are supposedly looking for clips for their portfolio and want writing experience. But even with the need for writing experience, some students' time is precious and they have other commitments. The same holds true for working adults. But I think the coolest part of citizen journalism is that despite having families to raise and jobs to work at, so many parents and adults have time to blog for their sites. They WANT to. It keeps them informed and also helps the neighborhood out at the same time.
Another aspect of citizen journalism is the community's bloggers become watchdogs, just like news reporters are supposed to be. Julie Faneslow's example of how a community helped eliminate a heroin/meth problem parallels a current story at my paper. On March 2, a graduate student/ teacher's assistant/ international student was shot by university police, after being Tasered and bean-bagged. Because the case is under investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the State Attorney's Office, reporters haven't been given much information. Fortunately, concerned citizens from the community have posted on every story about this incident and have come forward to the newsroom with tips. From family friends to coworkers and neighbors, the variety of sources has greatly assisted writers, and it was all made possible by feedback on our Web site.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
New Ways of Doing Journalism
After reading this blog about new media, I was pleased to find that I had actually used several of the media listed: Google Maps, Moms Like Me, Politifact, Newseums Front Pages, MLB.com At Bat, Kaiser Family Foundation, Flu Trends, and Wikipedia.
Out of all of them, I really found Politifact an excellent model for investigative/political journalism. I used it during the election when I was practicing my fact-finding on candidates, and I love how they take politicians' quotes and fact-check them. There's no point in reporting the news without questioning the sources. The site, a project of The St. Petersburg Times, even has an Obamameter that verifies all of the president's claims in his speeches and rates them from "true" to "false." Very useful, especially after the recent State of the Union address last month.
Flu Trends is a pretty neat concept: the spread of influenza is tracked across the nation based on people's searches online. The Centers for Disease Control is actually using the data mapped by searches to isolate the flu in hard-hit areas. This concept can be applied in so many areas. For instance, news sites can track which stories readers want to know more about, like the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile. People will search for both questions answered in news stories and also let editors know of any holes in the story.
I really like that the blog mentioned Wikipedia as a useful source of information. Being a college student, many of my college professors warn against trusting Wikipedia because it's generated by users... so what. The site does have a team verifying information, and the more users using the site means the faster the information is updated. I would never used Wikipedia as a primary source, but it is a great starting point for research and may make you consider something you never thought about before. It starts from the beginning and gives you the background in detail instead of just the latest covered in news stories.
Newseums Front Pages has come in handy this semester as a new design student. With a project due every week, it's nice to have a reference point of what other people are doing. Online news sites are great, but they aren't the same as the front page, and for me, I'm designing for print, not online, so this is extremely useful. Plus it gives you a tour around the country, with all the news stories legible in the newseum. The only problem about this site is that the pages aren't logged except on very big news days, like Sept. 11 or Haiti Earthquake. But there is an easy solution: Save the pages as a PDF.
---------
After looking at ads from the Newspaper Association of America, my thoughts were confirmed: I don't need to panic about my future as a journalist. I need to adapt.
All the world-is-doomed talk has been driving me nuts for the past three years. All I know is that I LIKE news. I LIKE people stories. I LIKE being connected to the world around me. Yes, the newspaper industry did suffer a loss, but so did every other business during the recession. When times are hard, toughen up. I'm trying my best to educate myself and prepare for my future-- hence, taking two capstone (specialization) courses at the University of Florida, and possibly a third. It isn't enough to graduate with an editing specialization. Writers are self-editing, and copy editors are being laid off. Specializing in magazine production is no good if I can't write anything worth reading to fill the pages. And advanced feature writing is useless without an appealing place for publication. Right now, my three specializations are giving me the chance to learn from people who have been through it all, which to me, is the best way to prepare for a career in journalism.
-----------
I loved the article on the Times' policy for its writers and Facebook.
One of the biggest rumors going around the career fair this week is that an interviewer will ask an interviewee to pull up his or her Facebook page during an interview. If he or she refuses, consider the rest of the interview and application worthless. I think it's a valid test. Why would a company hire someone whose personal life does not represent the company's mission. Why would the Times hire a completely biased reporter or a party-consumed college kid? They wouldn't. It's like a reporter walking into a barbecue restaurant while wearing a shirt that says 'PETA loves animals' and expecting a good interview.
Facebook has become a social "Big Brother" of my generation. People are quick to delete things they are ashamed of so no one else can pass it on. Privacy settings help conceal bad behavior from family members but allow people to share photo albums of party pics with their closest friends.
At my college paper, a recent ethical problem I've been seeing as an editor is students enrolled in the College of Journalism using other journalism/public relations students as sources in their freelance stories: It is a conflict of interest to interview someone for a story if they, too, have been published by the same publication. I don't understand how students are missing this. If someone says her major is journalism, don't interview her. Simple as that.
In another article, Facebook Connect received great reviews. I'm not sure if I understand what it does. It sounds like you can link Facebook to blogs. I'll have to play around with it this week and return to blog about it.
----------------
The last article I read this week wrote about job-searching online-- using online resume sites (like Monster.com).
The main problem for sites like these is the applicant pool is far too large. Recruiters are resorting to using niche job-search sites.
Applicants can also stand out by using multimedia sites to build an online resume that shows off talent better-- journalists can load their clips, sound files, video footage and photos all in one spot. Who is a recruiter going to hire? The student who has been blogging once a week for two years and updating their portfolio, or the person who writes a good essay/cover letter? The flat resume doesn't represent your personality fairly or give you a place to present your work. From a recruiter's point of view, a resume is the only way to get to know you, so be smart and don't do like these people did: NotHired.com-- great source of what not to do.
Out of all of them, I really found Politifact an excellent model for investigative/political journalism. I used it during the election when I was practicing my fact-finding on candidates, and I love how they take politicians' quotes and fact-check them. There's no point in reporting the news without questioning the sources. The site, a project of The St. Petersburg Times, even has an Obamameter that verifies all of the president's claims in his speeches and rates them from "true" to "false." Very useful, especially after the recent State of the Union address last month.
Flu Trends is a pretty neat concept: the spread of influenza is tracked across the nation based on people's searches online. The Centers for Disease Control is actually using the data mapped by searches to isolate the flu in hard-hit areas. This concept can be applied in so many areas. For instance, news sites can track which stories readers want to know more about, like the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile. People will search for both questions answered in news stories and also let editors know of any holes in the story.
I really like that the blog mentioned Wikipedia as a useful source of information. Being a college student, many of my college professors warn against trusting Wikipedia because it's generated by users... so what. The site does have a team verifying information, and the more users using the site means the faster the information is updated. I would never used Wikipedia as a primary source, but it is a great starting point for research and may make you consider something you never thought about before. It starts from the beginning and gives you the background in detail instead of just the latest covered in news stories.
Newseums Front Pages has come in handy this semester as a new design student. With a project due every week, it's nice to have a reference point of what other people are doing. Online news sites are great, but they aren't the same as the front page, and for me, I'm designing for print, not online, so this is extremely useful. Plus it gives you a tour around the country, with all the news stories legible in the newseum. The only problem about this site is that the pages aren't logged except on very big news days, like Sept. 11 or Haiti Earthquake. But there is an easy solution: Save the pages as a PDF.
---------
After looking at ads from the Newspaper Association of America, my thoughts were confirmed: I don't need to panic about my future as a journalist. I need to adapt.
All the world-is-doomed talk has been driving me nuts for the past three years. All I know is that I LIKE news. I LIKE people stories. I LIKE being connected to the world around me. Yes, the newspaper industry did suffer a loss, but so did every other business during the recession. When times are hard, toughen up. I'm trying my best to educate myself and prepare for my future-- hence, taking two capstone (specialization) courses at the University of Florida, and possibly a third. It isn't enough to graduate with an editing specialization. Writers are self-editing, and copy editors are being laid off. Specializing in magazine production is no good if I can't write anything worth reading to fill the pages. And advanced feature writing is useless without an appealing place for publication. Right now, my three specializations are giving me the chance to learn from people who have been through it all, which to me, is the best way to prepare for a career in journalism.
-----------
I loved the article on the Times' policy for its writers and Facebook.
One of the biggest rumors going around the career fair this week is that an interviewer will ask an interviewee to pull up his or her Facebook page during an interview. If he or she refuses, consider the rest of the interview and application worthless. I think it's a valid test. Why would a company hire someone whose personal life does not represent the company's mission. Why would the Times hire a completely biased reporter or a party-consumed college kid? They wouldn't. It's like a reporter walking into a barbecue restaurant while wearing a shirt that says 'PETA loves animals' and expecting a good interview.
Facebook has become a social "Big Brother" of my generation. People are quick to delete things they are ashamed of so no one else can pass it on. Privacy settings help conceal bad behavior from family members but allow people to share photo albums of party pics with their closest friends.
At my college paper, a recent ethical problem I've been seeing as an editor is students enrolled in the College of Journalism using other journalism/public relations students as sources in their freelance stories: It is a conflict of interest to interview someone for a story if they, too, have been published by the same publication. I don't understand how students are missing this. If someone says her major is journalism, don't interview her. Simple as that.
In another article, Facebook Connect received great reviews. I'm not sure if I understand what it does. It sounds like you can link Facebook to blogs. I'll have to play around with it this week and return to blog about it.
----------------
The last article I read this week wrote about job-searching online-- using online resume sites (like Monster.com).
The main problem for sites like these is the applicant pool is far too large. Recruiters are resorting to using niche job-search sites.
Applicants can also stand out by using multimedia sites to build an online resume that shows off talent better-- journalists can load their clips, sound files, video footage and photos all in one spot. Who is a recruiter going to hire? The student who has been blogging once a week for two years and updating their portfolio, or the person who writes a good essay/cover letter? The flat resume doesn't represent your personality fairly or give you a place to present your work. From a recruiter's point of view, a resume is the only way to get to know you, so be smart and don't do like these people did: NotHired.com-- great source of what not to do.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Google Alerts
As seen in the Jim Morrison and Charlie Crist anecdote, the reporter would have never gotten the story if his Google Alert didn't notify him that Crist was involved in this.
For me, as a reporter/editor and college student, I have set my Google alerts for my name and the college paper I work for, so that I may see whenever our publication is mentioned on other sites or my articles are used. Although my portfolio is small, a recent sexToon (satirical toon for our entertainment section) caused some controversy. Googled alerted me that The Gainesville Sun's The Chalkboard, Gatorsports.com, the Poynter Institute, and several bloggers had been running feedback for the cartoon. Although it was controversial, it's cool to see how far news travels.
For me, as a reporter/editor and college student, I have set my Google alerts for my name and the college paper I work for, so that I may see whenever our publication is mentioned on other sites or my articles are used. Although my portfolio is small, a recent sexToon (satirical toon for our entertainment section) caused some controversy. Googled alerted me that The Gainesville Sun's The Chalkboard, Gatorsports.com, the Poynter Institute, and several bloggers had been running feedback for the cartoon. Although it was controversial, it's cool to see how far news travels.
Social Media
I think in Gainesville,Fla., hyper local news coverage is overkill (and too expensive). It's such a small town revolving around the university, that people go to two print sources for news: The Gainesville Sun (city paper) and The Independent Florida Alligator (unofficial college paper). As an editor at The Alligator, I know that most of the staff's tips come from our fellow students and from wannabe freelance writers (enrolled in UF's College of Journalism). A lot of them come directly to the newsroom to pitch story ideas (and a lot have a personal agenda), but sometimes we get tips from Facebook event invitations, Facebook statuses and Twitter tweets. I don't think the majority of tips come from all these new medians. Most people post about their favorite subject: themselves. For this reason, I think the best source for stories is still word of mouth. Because our staff is so small (and paid so poorly), it's hard to get reliable writers to cover events. Oh the woe of working for a non-profit. Freelance writers and stringers will write about what they want. They'll cover the local pet adopt-a-thon instead of a city commission meeting. They don't care that the downtown square is turning 100 years old.
So how do we still manage to cover the most important issues?
I have not been swept up in the Twitter craze, and I still do not own a smartphone. However, I do still talk to everyone, about everything. My two roommates are in sororities, the business fraternity and the pre-med fraternity. My best friend works the local bar scene. The girls I work with are as different as can be, and they keep me informed. The people I deal with daily are my moles. Aside from the people I see every day, I think one of the most important sources for story ideas is our Letters to the Editors, and now, our comments on the paper's Web site. Most people read the print-version of the paper because they read it while on campus when they're bored and don't have their laptop. If they bring their computer and they're bored, they'll check Facebook and their e-mail. Guys may visit ESPN.com and girls might see what Perez Hilton's latest rant is about. But there is hope. People do still give feedback. People do still complain.
Our readers follow the 90-9-1 rule: Ninety percent of readers are lurkers who never contribute, 9 percent contribute a little and 1 percent contribute every day on every story. People feel special when their Letters to the Editor get published. They think they're right because we ran their letter. We ran their letter because we're curious to see how other people will react to the letter. This is where crowd-sourcing plays a part in news stories. Message boards and user comments on Web site are a great source of feedback from locals. Reporters can read about common concerns, and perhaps even get tips. But I still think that everyone needs to step back and remember that people are the heart of news stories. All the latest social media are just medians for people to speak up and say what's on their mind. I bet they'd just tell you if you asked in person.
By the way, my Facebook status reads: "I love my fwends <3."
-Yeah, that would make a great news story ;)
So how do we still manage to cover the most important issues?
I have not been swept up in the Twitter craze, and I still do not own a smartphone. However, I do still talk to everyone, about everything. My two roommates are in sororities, the business fraternity and the pre-med fraternity. My best friend works the local bar scene. The girls I work with are as different as can be, and they keep me informed. The people I deal with daily are my moles. Aside from the people I see every day, I think one of the most important sources for story ideas is our Letters to the Editors, and now, our comments on the paper's Web site. Most people read the print-version of the paper because they read it while on campus when they're bored and don't have their laptop. If they bring their computer and they're bored, they'll check Facebook and their e-mail. Guys may visit ESPN.com and girls might see what Perez Hilton's latest rant is about. But there is hope. People do still give feedback. People do still complain.
Our readers follow the 90-9-1 rule: Ninety percent of readers are lurkers who never contribute, 9 percent contribute a little and 1 percent contribute every day on every story. People feel special when their Letters to the Editor get published. They think they're right because we ran their letter. We ran their letter because we're curious to see how other people will react to the letter. This is where crowd-sourcing plays a part in news stories. Message boards and user comments on Web site are a great source of feedback from locals. Reporters can read about common concerns, and perhaps even get tips. But I still think that everyone needs to step back and remember that people are the heart of news stories. All the latest social media are just medians for people to speak up and say what's on their mind. I bet they'd just tell you if you asked in person.
By the way, my Facebook status reads: "I love my fwends <3."
-Yeah, that would make a great news story ;)
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Media Ride-along
I was thinking of doing my media ride-along on The Huffington Post because it is a liberal blog and news site that covers almost every topic. It now has versions in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Denver. I love how bloggers are linked to the news site as columnists.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
My backup site would be the Drudge Report or the Political Simpleton. However, I think both sites Web sites pale in comparison with The Huffington Post because they are not organized very well and the layouts are ugly.
http://www.drudgereport.com/
http://www.politicalsimpleton.com/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
My backup site would be the Drudge Report or the Political Simpleton. However, I think both sites Web sites pale in comparison with The Huffington Post because they are not organized very well and the layouts are ugly.
http://www.drudgereport.com/
http://www.politicalsimpleton.com/
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Eagle snatches dog
With every story, it is the editor's job to be skeptical, especially of information sources provide. If it's not possible for the claim to be confirmed through background research, then the best alternative is finding as many witnesses as possible to describe the wild story. Even if witnesses are found, the editor must then question the plausibility of their claims-- for example, is what they're saying unreasonable?
In the example with the eagle snatching the puppy, there were too many variables unknown to really justify publishing this it in a newspaper. The gas attendant was the only witness. The story's location was miles and miles from the newspaper's circulation area. There's no attribution for any of the statements (about the owners' exclamations). This just seemed like an amusing story on a slow news day. Still, I think readers enjoy these tales. Perhaps creating a blog for the newspaper's Web site would be a good compromise: The paper doesn't get criticized for running "non-news," and the readers still get their laughs.
For the article and critique, visit this link: http://www.snopes.com/critters/mishaps/dognap.asp
In the example with the eagle snatching the puppy, there were too many variables unknown to really justify publishing this it in a newspaper. The gas attendant was the only witness. The story's location was miles and miles from the newspaper's circulation area. There's no attribution for any of the statements (about the owners' exclamations). This just seemed like an amusing story on a slow news day. Still, I think readers enjoy these tales. Perhaps creating a blog for the newspaper's Web site would be a good compromise: The paper doesn't get criticized for running "non-news," and the readers still get their laughs.
For the article and critique, visit this link: http://www.snopes.com/critters/mishaps/dognap.asp
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Thoughts on journalism's many crises
As the death toll rose for victims of Haiti's earthquake, America's sympathy grew, too. More people began watching the nightly news, while others even resorted to purchasing the daily paper. It didn't matter which part of the United States you lived in-- all the papers had the same front page: "Help needed." While I was busy responding to freelance stories at my college paper, all pertaining to campus responses to the earthquake, my roommate was studying for her MCAT. When I asked her for her thoughts on Haiti, she asked me to tell her what happened. The girl never has her phone out of sight, she has Internet access several times a day and she has a car with a radio, yet she was oblivious to this horrific event. How can somebody have such tunnel vision that he or she can only see things like test scores and GPAs. It baffles me. Our world is so connected to everything, and yet people like her exist. It's no wonder journalism is in a crisis.
My roommate doesn't pretend to read the paper. She says she has no interest in politics or current events. And she definitely visits Facebook more than any online newspaper. She's actually one of the few college students I know who is perfectly fine with being out of touch with the world they live in. After reading blogs about "decline in circulation," "decrease in advertising," and a"distrust of the media" I've come to a conclusion: Newspapers never reached the type of person my roommate is, and they never will find a way how to in the future. People who don't care about the world around them still won't care in 50 years. It is a journalist's job to reach the people who do care, and to reach those who used to care.
For my generation, learning how to interact online is a skill to be mastered. Checking my e-mail a few times a day is not sufficient. I must check it at least every hour (unless I get a smart phone that alerts me instantly whenever I receive a new e-mail). I also must tweet, Facebook, blog daily to keep up with my peers. The Internet is a tool for me, and I think it should be a tool for journalism, as well. I don't think it is the Internet that is killing journalism. Yes, print newspapers can be accessed for free online. Yes, bloggers write political commentary that rivals Op/Ed pieces in print. Yes, Craigslist is the new classifieds section.
So what. People who do care about the news need a place they can go and trust for their news. Wikipedia isn't good enough. I think future reporters all be working for something like the Associated Press. Reporters will be racing to update a story to the wire, and editors will be trying to keep up. The fundamentals for reporting will still be the same: accuracy, brevity, clarity. No one may be working from the same newsroom; in fact, a newsroom might not even exist in the future. It's neat to imagine reporters keeping in touch through text messages and tweets and uploading their stories to a Google doc, and then to the wire. If a fact error makes it onto the wire, an editor's note should say so ASAP. The same may happen with photojournalists. Upload the photo first, find out the details for a caption later. People can sense when something is big. It's part of our human connection.
My uncertainty remains in the time it takes for this change to happen. I graduate next year, and I haven't had a newspaper internship outside of my college's paper. Our editor in chief had a potential employer tell her that when she got actual newsroom experience, she should return with clips. If the editor in chief of a good college paper can't get "enough experience" for her resume, who can? It's like the vicious cycle of getting a serving job: Restaurants won't hire you until you have some serving experience. You can't get experience unless someone hires you.
It's ridiculous.
My roommate doesn't pretend to read the paper. She says she has no interest in politics or current events. And she definitely visits Facebook more than any online newspaper. She's actually one of the few college students I know who is perfectly fine with being out of touch with the world they live in. After reading blogs about "decline in circulation," "decrease in advertising," and a"distrust of the media" I've come to a conclusion: Newspapers never reached the type of person my roommate is, and they never will find a way how to in the future. People who don't care about the world around them still won't care in 50 years. It is a journalist's job to reach the people who do care, and to reach those who used to care.
For my generation, learning how to interact online is a skill to be mastered. Checking my e-mail a few times a day is not sufficient. I must check it at least every hour (unless I get a smart phone that alerts me instantly whenever I receive a new e-mail). I also must tweet, Facebook, blog daily to keep up with my peers. The Internet is a tool for me, and I think it should be a tool for journalism, as well. I don't think it is the Internet that is killing journalism. Yes, print newspapers can be accessed for free online. Yes, bloggers write political commentary that rivals Op/Ed pieces in print. Yes, Craigslist is the new classifieds section.
So what. People who do care about the news need a place they can go and trust for their news. Wikipedia isn't good enough. I think future reporters all be working for something like the Associated Press. Reporters will be racing to update a story to the wire, and editors will be trying to keep up. The fundamentals for reporting will still be the same: accuracy, brevity, clarity. No one may be working from the same newsroom; in fact, a newsroom might not even exist in the future. It's neat to imagine reporters keeping in touch through text messages and tweets and uploading their stories to a Google doc, and then to the wire. If a fact error makes it onto the wire, an editor's note should say so ASAP. The same may happen with photojournalists. Upload the photo first, find out the details for a caption later. People can sense when something is big. It's part of our human connection.
My uncertainty remains in the time it takes for this change to happen. I graduate next year, and I haven't had a newspaper internship outside of my college's paper. Our editor in chief had a potential employer tell her that when she got actual newsroom experience, she should return with clips. If the editor in chief of a good college paper can't get "enough experience" for her resume, who can? It's like the vicious cycle of getting a serving job: Restaurants won't hire you until you have some serving experience. You can't get experience unless someone hires you.
It's ridiculous.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Watchdogs and copy editors
The article "Whoppers of 2009" emphasizes journalists' need to be extremely vigilant. I thought it was very interesting how many errors the article's writer found in President Barack Obama's speeches. You would think that the president would have someone, perhaps a speech writer, to fact-check his speeches. I don't understand how these mistakes made it all the way to press conferences without anyone catching the exaggerations and understatements. This reminds me of something Norm Lewis taught us in Editing last semester: The public is more willing to overlook a fact error than a misspelling or math miscalculation. If journalists fail to question our fellow writers and public speakers, who will?
This leads me to think of the article "Is the term 'copy editor' becoming obsolete?" Copy editors are required to do so many tasks these days that it's becoming a real challenge for them to catch fact errors. The article cites copy editors designing pages, uploading multimedia and generating story ideas, along with checking grammar, spelling and numbers. I think that the world does need more copy editors. However, it needs more people acting as watchdogs, too. As an editor at my college's unofficial paper, it pains me to have to double-check everything my writers write because I don't trust their reporting. I shouldn't have to look up every proper noun in a story, but I do. I shouldn't have to call sources, but I do. I shouldn't have to call my writers for more crucial information, but I do.
Copy editors are needed. Watchdogs are needed. Better reporters are needed.
This leads me to think of the article "Is the term 'copy editor' becoming obsolete?" Copy editors are required to do so many tasks these days that it's becoming a real challenge for them to catch fact errors. The article cites copy editors designing pages, uploading multimedia and generating story ideas, along with checking grammar, spelling and numbers. I think that the world does need more copy editors. However, it needs more people acting as watchdogs, too. As an editor at my college's unofficial paper, it pains me to have to double-check everything my writers write because I don't trust their reporting. I shouldn't have to look up every proper noun in a story, but I do. I shouldn't have to call sources, but I do. I shouldn't have to call my writers for more crucial information, but I do.
Copy editors are needed. Watchdogs are needed. Better reporters are needed.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
First blog of 2010
Hi, my name is Rachael. I'm creating this blog for my Advanced Editing course at the University of Florida. I hope you enjoy reading.
“I became a journalist to come as close as possible to the heart of the world.”- Henry R. Luce, American publisher and editor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)